Thanks for the reply >In this instance we have a (broadly) common language that runs on Windows, Mac, Linux and then some - thats pretty amazing. We have enou

Thanks for the reply >In this instance we have a (broadly) common language that runs on Windows, Mac, Linux and then some - thats pretty amazing. We have enough VM's that can do the same, it's not really a technical issue, which is what frustrates me. >It would be trite to point out that what you have "under the hood" in JavaScript implementations is a pretty good JIT bytecode interpreter. Yep, and I'd rather be able to target that. > JavaScript code represents a fully portable version of the code that will run in the user chosen browser on the user chosen hardware platform. It isn't fully portable really. Much less than any standardized bytecode anyway. One thing I've also struggled with is that I not only have to figure out Javascript I have to figure out each browser's take on it. I've had the same code fail subtly on Chrome while working fine on Firefox. > for how to add "forEach" functionality to an array I implemented this kind of thing in my own code and it works although the "block" syntax is a bit ugly ("function() {}"). > I just love the ability to work with arrays (collections) of objects representing server side classes. I'm not sure what you mean here. One bit that has frustrated me is replicating in Javascript code what I already have for the same concepts/models in Rails. Although some of that is surely bad separation between client and server on my part.